2006 archive

A common bleat amongst conservatives of a certain stripe is that the government–any government at every level–should be run like a business. Without analysis, this seems to make sense.

But what is the purpose of a business:

My take is that the purpose of a business is to provide a needed (or wanted) good or service, while making a profit so as to continue to provide that good or service and provide a reasonable return to the owners or shareholders. There’s more to it than just making money. Bucket shops make money, and bucket shops are illegal; they are illegal because they do not provide a good or service.

The purpose of government is different. The Founders expressed it probably as well as it has ever been expressed in the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America:

. . . to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity

This is inherently not a profit-making endeavor. A government does well if it breaks even. And the return to the shareholders (if I may use that term to represent the citizens–oh, well, I’m going to do it anyway) is freedom and security.

So from the notion that a government should be run like a business fails from the start.

Now, there is this much truth: the principles of management–of how to get things done and how to lead people are the same in government, business, or any other organization: having clear goals; planning how to reach those goals; treating employees and customers (or citizens) fairly, openly, and honestly; behaving ethically; keeping one’s word, selecting staff based on competence and achievement–those are immutable.

Now let us consider the current Federal Administration:

Lies, duplicity, underhandedness.

They say one thing and do another.

For example

Bush says, “Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so. It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.”

And Bush says “that he allowed the NSA ‘to intercept the international communications of people with known links to al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations.'”

And they do: . . . the number of Americans subject to eavesdropping by the NSA could be in the millions if the full range of secret NSA programs is used.

They say they are looking out for the financial welfare of the nation, while running up the deficit and selling off the treasure of the country to the highest bidder.

Yes, they are running the government like a business.

A Texas business.

The CEO believes he can do whatever he can do, regardless of the rules.

He and his staff break the law and claim they are obeying it.
Yeah, I know I’ve used the link before, but it’s powerful enough to warrant it.

No, that’s not right. They say many things, and do many others.

Employee loyalty is more important than integrity and honesty.

They hide their actions from the sharehol–citizens.

And they lie when confronted.

They are running the country like a Texas business.

Enron.

A business based on self-aggrandizement of the CEO, grown in duplicity, fertilized in fraud, and nurtured on lies.

And soon we will be saying what Enron says on its website:

(The United States of America) is in the midst of restructuring various businesses for distribution as ongoing companies to its creditors and liquidating its remaining operations . . .

. . . while watching our Chief Executive continue to deny the rules apply to him, as they do to others.

Professor Tribe addressed the NSA surveillance program in circumspect language in a letter to Congressman John Conyers (emphasis added):

The inescapable conclusion is that the AUMF did not implicitly authorize what the FISA expressly prohibited. It follows that the presidential program of surveillance at issue here is a violation of the separation of powers — as grave an abuse of executive authority as I can recall ever having studied.

Follow the link to read the entire analysis.

[EDITORIAL MODE ON]

The antics of the current Federal Administration, the arrogance, the autocratic behavior, the self-righteousness, the base hypocrisy–I am speechless.

More later.

[EDITORIAL MODE OFF]

These were sent to me by one of my friends. I havd not verified them, but they look real to me:

“The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men.” – Samuel Adams

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” – Samuel Adams

“A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.” – Samuel Adams

“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right . . . and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the character and conduct of their rulers.” – John Adams

“There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.” – John Adams

“Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people.” – John Adams

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

“He that is secure is not safe.” – Benjamin Franklin

“The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.” – George Washington

“Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.” – George Washington

“Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of Liberty abused to licentiousness.” – George Washington

“God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.” – Daniel Webster

“Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.” – Daniel Webster

“Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster and what has happened once in 6,000 years, may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world.” – Daniel Webster

“The contest, for ages, has been to rescue Liberty from the grasp of executive power.” – Daniel Webster

“Whatever government is not a government of laws, is a despotism, let it be called what they may.” – Daniel Webster

“To maintain the ascendancy of the Constitution over the lawmaking majority is the great and essential point on which the success of the [American] system must depend; unless that ascendancy can be preserved, the necessary consequence must be that the laws will supersede the Constitution; and, finally, the will of the Executive, by influence of its patronage, will supersede the laws …” – John C. Calhoun

“Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step over the ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! — All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a Thousand years. At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.” – Abraham Lincoln

“The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living and the get-rich-quick theory of life.” – Theodore Roosevelt

“The president is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or anyone else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about anyone else.” – Theodore Roosevelt

“If the fires of freedom and civil liberties burn low in other lands, they must be made brighter in our own. If in other lands the press and books and literature of all kinds are censored, we must redouble our efforts here to keep them free. If in other lands the eternal truths of the past are threatened by intolerance, we must provide a safe place for their perception.” – Franklin D. Roosevelt

“It is a good thing to demand liberty for ourselves and for those who agree with us, but it is a better thing and a rarer thing to give liberty to others who do not agree with us.” – Franklin D. Roosevelt

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” – Harry S. Truman

“Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels — men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, we may never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower

“It is an ancient truth that freedom cannot be legislated into existence, so it is no less obvious that freedom cannot be censored into existence. And any who act as if freedom’s defenses are found in suppression and suspicion and fear confess a doctrine that is alien to America.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower

“There is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger than an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.” – John F. Kennedy

“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” – John F. Kennedy

“The Constitution supposes what the history of all governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the legislature. [If a president is successful in bypassing the Congress] it is evident that the people are cheated out of the best ingredients in the government, the safeguards of peace which is the greatest of their blessings.” – Richard M. Nixon (Jeez, even Nixon–ed.)

/////////

“If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of a lot easier. Just so long as I’m the dictator.” – George W. Bush (December 2000)

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” – George W. Bush (November 2005)

The ancient Romans recognized that, in times of threat, it might be necessary to concentrate power in the hands of one man.

They called him “dictator” from the verb “dictare,” to say:

dict.are V 1 1 PRES ACTIVE INF 0 X
dict.are V 1 1 PRES PASSIVE IND 2 S Early
dict.are V 1 1 PRES PASSIVE IMP 2 S
dicto, dictare, dictavi, dictatus V [XXXCX]
say repeatedly/often/frequently; dictate (for writing); compose; order;
Syncope r => v.r
Syncopated perfect often drops the ‘v’ and contYeah, he was a demagogue and a shyster. But he was a crook racts vowel
dictav.ere V 1 1 PERF ACTIVE IND 3 P
dicto, dictare, dictavi, dictatus V [XXXCX]
say repeatedly/often/frequently; dictate (for writing); compose; order;

The dictator could be appointed by the Consuls (the chief authorities of the Roman Republic) for a term not to exceed six months. During that period, the Dictator had absolute authority (in other words, his actions were not subject to veto by the Tribunes–those charged with protecting the interests of the plebeian class, that is, the common people). At the end of six months, the Dictator’s authority lapsed.

(Remember, this was before the time of the Roman Empire; the empire commenced in 44 B. C.)

Let us compare this to our current situation.

Terrorists attacked the World Trade center.

The House and Senate of the United States decided that the executive branch needed more power to attempt to investigate and prevent addition attacks. They passed the (amusingly labelled) “Patriot Act.”

Then the Executive decided that that law, in conjunction with the FISA law, passed in 1978, did not give him enough power. Among other things, FISA established a special, secret court to oversee and authorize secret surveillance. Furthermore, it authorized the Executive to commence surveillance without prior authorization, giving it a 72-hour grace period in which to obtain authorization.

No, they were not enough for the Executive.

He wanted to do what he wanted to do, when he wanted to do it, without supervision.

Accordingly, the Executive appointed himself Dictator, with authority to disregard laws, even as he signs them, without an expiration date. And didn’t even tell anyone about it.

By God, it’s his sandbox, and he’s going to play in it! After all, he has capital.

Huey Long was once asked if America would ever have fascism. “Yes,” he replied, “but we will call it anti-fascism.”

Yeah, Huey Long was a demagogue and a shyster. But he was a demagogue who could foretell the future and a shyster who tried to help the common man, the Plebeians, if you will. Change the words, keep the thought, and Huey’s prediction is coming true even as I type this.

And Executive in this country used to acknowledge the rule of law. What a joke.

All in all, I think the Ancient Romans had a better system. At least then the public knew when there was a Dictator, and therefore knew when the term would be up.

Prices are up significantly in the last week.

Gibbstown, NJ, Valero, $2.25.

Paulsboro, NJ, Lukoil, $2.23.

Paulsboro, NJ, Exxon, $2.13.

Paulsboro, NJ, BP, $2.24.

Claymont, Del., Exxon, $2.35.

Claymont, Del., Sunoco, $2.31.

Claymont, Del., Getty, $2.29.

Claymont, Del., BP, $2.31.

Claymont, Del., Gulf (Cumberland Farms), $2.31.

Claymont, Del., Gulf, $2.31.

Claymont, Del, Wawa, $2.31.

Holly Oak, Del, Mobil, $2.31.

Penny Hill, Del., Getty, $2.32.

Penny Hill, Del., BP, $2.32.

Penny Hill, Del, Exxon, $2.33.

I had a stray thought this morning while I was getting ready to attend my little Methodist church.

Maybe I would benefit from reading the Koran. Perhaps doing that would help me understand Sunni and Shiite and all those things in between.

Then I thought, gosh, if I try to borrow it from the library, will I get a visit from the FBI?

If I try to buy a copy in a bookstore, assuming I could find it, would the clerk turn me in?

If I try to download it from the web, will the NSA start monitoring me (assuming they haven’t already–they seem to be data mining, as opposed to eavesdropping)?

I think we all owe Mr. Bush a wave of gratitude for making us afraid of learning.

. . . Now, you know the part of your dream in which the executive branch secretly spies on Americans, without any judicial oversight, and President Bush denies that it represents the grabbing of “dictatorial” powers? That’s just crazy. I mean, did you watch an Oliver Stone movie before bed? Because if an American president is ever forced to deny that he’s becoming like a dictator, the nation is probably already in deep trouble.

(snip)

Next, regarding your dream’s scene about Bush’s policy toward Iraq: The United States would never invade another country based on fabricated or misleading evidence of an imminent threat. It’s even more inconceivable that it would happen without support from the United Nations. Why? Because it would set global cooperation back by decades, and that would weaken our ability to address to urgent transnational threats — like terrorism. Why would a president want to do that? . . .

Eerily retroforecastic, isn’t it? Follow the link to read the entire column.

The rumor is that an army of 81-year-old retired professors of history is massing at the borders even as we speak.

In the 50 years that Grant Goodman has known and corresponded with a colleague in the Philippines he never had any reason to suspect that their friendship was anything but spectacularly ordinary.

But now he believes that the relationship has somehow sparked the interest of the Department of Homeland Security and led the agency to place him under surveillance.

Last month Goodman, an 81-year-old retired University of Kansas history professor, received a letter from his friend in the Philippines that had been opened and resealed with a strip of dark green tape bearing the words “by Border Protection” and carrying the official Homeland Security seal.

The story at the other end of the link points out the Professor Goodman’s correspondent is the Phillipines is also a history professor and a Catholic and that the correspondence has been going on for 50 years. It is therefore unlikely that the Professor’s friend poses a threat to the peace, either here or in the Phillipines.

I am more and more convinced that the current Federal Administration really has no idea what to do to protect the United States from enemies without, so it’s just flailing about hoping to catch someone in its nets.

Like the numerous Al Qaeda Number Threes.

But 81-year-old retired history professors?

It ranks right up there with mis-identifying fingerprints (emphasis added).

The Justice Department’s internal watchdog yesterday faulted the FBI for sloppy work in mistakenly linking an Oregon lawyer, a Muslim convert, to the 2004 Madrid train bombings but said the government did not misuse the antiterror Patriot Act against him.

Brandon Mayfield was arrested after his fingerprint was erroneously found to match one on a bag containing detonators like those used in the Spain attacks.

It’s really not like matching fingerprints is new technology. There’s not much room for excuses here, folks.

Panicky incompetence is still incompetence. And wrapping it in the flag while maintaining an atmosphere of fear does not change that.

An alternative to Darwinism:

Learn about it here.

This morning NPR had a powerful report on the Sago Mine explosion.

It was not an expose; it was not a policy discussion; it was not a polemic.

It was simply a narration of events. Follow the link to listen to it.

The miners and townspeople recall a grim week in a West Virginia coal town: an explosion, prayers amid worst fears, false hopes, a cruel twist and then a final realization that 12 workers are dead.

A Republican President.

A Republican Congress.

And he can’t get his appointments through.

I am reminded of an old Firesign Theater Album.

HISTORICALLY, PRESIDENT Bush’s decision Wednesday to make 17 job appointments during a congressional recess isn’t out of the ordinary. The Constitution grants the president “Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate.” This device was intended as an emergency exception to the general confirmation rule, at a time when Congress had short sessions and frequent breaks. But presidents of both parties have, for decades now, seized on this power as a way to sidestep Senate opposition to their choices for key jobs. Ronald Reagan made 243 recess appointments, Bill Clinton made 140. With these new announcements, President Bush has made 123 recess appointments in five years.

What’s worrying about many of Mr. Bush’s recess nominees is the caliber of the candidates and the importance of the jobs in which they have been installed. Even before Wednesday’s raft of appointments, the ambassador to the United Nations and the head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division held power by virtue of this maneuver. Now Mr. Bush has added the number two official at the Defense Department, Deputy Secretary Gordon R. England, and the head of the immigration bureau, Julie L. Myers — hardly minor jobs.

This whole charade of recess appointments could be avoided if the current Federal Administration chose to nominate competent persons for appointive posts. But that’s too much to hope for. Ideology trumps competence. And we all know what trump brings us: Greed, conceit, and bankruptcy.

The IRS has been collecting information about citizens’ political registrations. They claim it was an accident. They also claim that they made no use of the data. The misconduct was brought to light through the actions of the IRS employees’ union:

John Dalrymple, the IRS’ deputy commissioner for operations support, wrote Kelley that he reviewed the data after the union brought the matter to his attention and found the private data collectors drew from voter registration information for individuals in 21 states.

“However, the IRS makes no use of any information related to political party affiliation because IRS rules prohibit such usage,” he wrote. “The only portion of voter registration information that is used relates to the voter’s address.”

Given the stellar track record the current Federal Administration has established for being truthful, why am I not impressed?

As the two or three of you who regularly read this blog know, I am a Christian. I was raised Southern Baptist (and, as a footnote, the Southern Baptist tradition in which I was raised is in no way related to the current conduct of the Southern Baptist Convention), attended Roman Catholic churches for years, because by ex-wife was Roman Catholic, and now attend a little local Methodist Church, not because of any specific adherence to Methodism, but because of the character of the congregation.

So I am well familiar with both the “evangelical” tradition and the non-evangelical tradition.

There are those around us who wear their Christian beliefs as if they were some kind of flag, while at the same time doing and saying things that are somewhat odd.

Accordingly, I found this post quite thought-provoking. Follow the link to read more:

Recently, I sat in dismay as I watched a television show that featured a prominent Christian author defending the use of torture in the war against terrorism. I was outraged that this man could try to make a case for followers of Jesus condoning such an immoral practice. I shared my feelings with a group of fellow Evangelicals and was stunned when the consensus that emerged from this group of Christians was in agreement with this author.

One of those in the group was wearing one of those WWJD bracelets that proposes that when facing any decision and in every circumstance, the question should be asked, “What would Jesus do?” He evaded the question as to whether or not Jesus would torture a terrorist.

Last year (about a week ago) I fulminated about the dispute on dredging the Delaware as contrasted with the one about LNG-ing the Delaware.

In today’s local rag, Monica Yant Kinney, a columnist who concentrates on the New Jersey beat, unloaded on the politicians’ antics surrounding the dredging proposal:

A bunch of politicians are standing on the banks of the Delaware River arguing over whether it needs to be a scant five feet deeper.

One by one, the men take aim and mark their turf.

The goal of the game? Bragging rights, naturally. Boys will be boys, even when they’re statesmen.

How about separation of Church and Church?

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has rejected a Philadelphia parish’s attempt to quit the Episcopal Diocese of Pennsylvania, but ruled that the parish – not the diocese – holds title to its assets.

Opera CEO Jon von Tetzchner answered questions submitted by Slashdot readers.

See the inteview here.

We don’t get much of it here. But about once a decade we got socked.

I found an old website lurking on my webserver with pictures from the big snow of 2003, so I repaired a couple of links and edited a few errors

You can see it here.